THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.

Translate

Sunday, September 18, 2016

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

As a U.S. senator, Hillary Clinton helped arrange for $1.65 billion in low-interest, federally guaranteed “Liberty Bonds” (supposedly earmarked for post-9/11 rebuilding in New York City) to subsidize the construction of Goldman Sachs’ gleaming new headquarters building in Lower Manhattan. During the 2005 groundbreaking ceremony for the project, she affectionately called the firm her “partner in government.” Three years later she supported the $10 billion Federal Reserve bailout of her too-big-to-jail “partner.” In return, Goldman paid her at least $675,000 for three speeches; has donated huge sums to her campaign; and recently prohibited its employees from donating anything to the Trump campaign. Her son-in-law was handed a hedge fund to manage by the CEO of Goldman Sachs (and reportedly lost 90% of the fund’s value).

So it was no surprise that Hillary feigned great offense at Donald Trump’s recent criticism of the Federal Reserve Board’s policy of “easy money” that pushes interest rates close to zero. “You should not be commenting on Fed actions when you are either running for president or you are president,” she indignantly declared.

Hillary Clinton apparently believes that there are four branches of government, not three and that the fourth branch – the Sacred Fed – should never be criticized by any of the other three. It’s OK for President Obama to criticize the Supreme Court during a state-of-the-union address; and for congress and the executive branch to engage in verbal sparring on a daily basis; but no president (let alone a lowly congressman) should ever make a negative comment about the Sacred Fed, according to the Hillary Doctrine.

This new Clintonian theory of American politics is yet another defense of the corrupt system of Fed-financed crony capitalism that enriches companies like Goldman Sachs with cheap credit and government bailouts. In return, the crony capitalists finance the careers and lifestyles of fabulously wealthy politicians like the Clintons. The Fed is the main financing mechanism of this racket, which is why Hillary wants to isolate it from criticism. In her world, any criticism of the Sacred Fed is, well, deplorable.

As David Stockman wrote in The Great Deformation, “the central banking branch of the state remains hostage to the Wall Street speculators who threaten a hissy fit sell-off unless they are juiced again and again. Monetary policy has thus become an engine of reverse Robin Hood redistribution; it [espouses] theories that punish Main Street savers [with near-zero interest rates], workers, and businessmen while creating endless opportunities . . . for speculative gain in the Wall Street casino.”

Stockman points out that in early 2008 it was not so much “the economy” that was crashing but the stock prices of companies like Goldman Sachs. The company was “handed $10 billion [by the Fed] to save itself from alleged extinction. Yet it then swivelled on a dime and generated a $29 billion surplus” that funded “$16 billion in salary and bonuses” for Goldman Sachs executives in that one year. The Fed also purchased more than $100 billion in basically worthless illiquid toxic assets from Goldman Sachs.

The $180 billion bailout of the insurance company AIG was “all about protecting short-term earnings and current-year executive and trader bonuses” as well, since 90% of the company’s assets were solvent, writes Stockman. (Goldman Sachs also had $18 billion in claims against AIG, which it was able to collect thanks to the bailout).

Contrary to Hillary Clinton’s “Never Question the Fed” theory, presidents and members of Congress have always commented on Fed policy as a matter of course. In a 1978 article in the academic Journal of Monetary Economics, economist Robert Weintraub explained how a long line of presidents influenced Fed policy with their public statements. When President Eisenhower feared inflation and expressed a wish for slower monetary growth, the Fed complied with the slowest monetary growth in a decade. President Kennedy then advocated more rapid monetary growth and the Fed accommodated him as well.

President Johnson wanted even more rapid monetary growth to finance his expansion of the welfare state and the Vietnam War, and the Fed complied by more than doubling the rate of growth of the money supply. President Nixon’s reelection was all but assured by the actions of the Fed, which grew the money supply in 1972 faster than in any other year since the end of World War II. When Nixon’s successor, President Ford, campaigned against inflation the Fed got the hint and slowed monetary growth, only to rev it up again when President Carter expressed a wish for faster growth.

What all of this means is that the Fed is an engine of political corruption and economic instability. It has generated inflation rather than controlling it (the dollar is worth less than 5% of its value in 1913, the year the Fed was created); has caused endless boom-and-bust cycles such as the 2008 real estate market crash; hides the true cost of government, especially the costs of war; and generates what economists call a “political business cycle” as described by Robert Weintraub’s research.

Donald Trump – like former Congressman Ron Paul – is not only within his rights and in keeping with American history to criticize the Fed, but is performing a desperately-needed public service in doing so. He is a businessman and not an economist, but his economic instincts regarding the Fed are right on the money. He has criticized it for creating a “bubble economy,” especially a stock market bubble. His latest criticism is essentially the economically-sound notion that price controls are always and everywhere a bad and destructive idea, and the Fed’s policy of “interest rate targeting” is nothing but price control dressed up in fancy economic lingo. He hasn’t yet called for an end to the Fed, perhaps because he fears that it might cause Hillary to have another seizure.

Clinton, who was diagnosed with pneumonia, is on a 10 day supply of Levaquin.

Levaquin is the brand name for levofloxacin, which is part of a class of drugs called fluoroquinolones, intended to treat major infections like pneumonia, anthrax exposure, plague and urinary tract infections.

Call 6 Investigates has been looking into potential safety issues with the drug, including devastating side effects like tendon rupture, nerve damage and psychiatric problems.

In July, the Food and Drug Administration officially approved safety labeling changes for fluoroquinolones including an updated “boxed warning,” also known as a black box warning, which is the FDA’s most serious type of warning mandated by the agency.

The warnings advise patients that the serious side effects generally outweigh the benefits for patients with sinus infections, chronic bronchitis, and urinary tract infections, and fluoroquinolones should be used as a last resort.

An FDA safety review found the drugs can cause serious, disabling, and potentially permanent side effects involving the tendons, muscles, joints, nerves and central nervous system.

Call 6 Investigates reached out to the Clinton campaign, but they have not yet responded, so it’s unclear if Clinton was aware of the new FDA “black box” warnings when she started taking Levaquin.

Dr. Charles Bennett, a vocal critic of Levaquin who has not treated Clinton, said her doctors should examine the presidential candidate for possible side effects including muscle weakness.

Clinton recently raised concerns when she appeared to struggled to walk while leaving a 9/11 ceremony.

“It could be a serious drug reaction,” said Bennett. “The best thing to do is stop the drug, I would suggest, if it’s a potential serious adverse drug reaction. You can use many other antibiotics for pneumonia. I would defer to her physicians there.”

Bennett said he is surprised Hillary Clinton was prescribed Levaquin, given the recent label changes and serious side effect concerns.

“Our data estimates the FDA receives several thousand reports per year of this toxicity, and several thousand deaths,” said Bennett. “This is equivalent to a 747 plane going down once a month.”

ATLANTA - Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is now taking an antibiotic with side-effects so risky, the FDA put out new warnings about the drug less than two months ago.

Her doctor says the drug Levaquin is treating Clinton's pneumonia.

Channel 2 Consumer investigator Jim Strickland first exposed trouble with the drug nearly two years ago.

Strickland’s sources alerted him to Clinton's 10-day regimen on the drug.

"She indeed was given Levaquin, and I think that's just crazy," said side-effect sufferer Nicole Delaine, of Peachtree Corners.

Her testimony to an FDA panel helped sway the agency to issue the new warnings.

Hillary Clinton prescribed controversial antibiotics

Published on Sep 16, 2016

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is now taking an antibiotic with side-effects so risky, the FDA put out new warnings about the drug less than two months ago. Her doctor says the drug Levaquin is treating Clinton's pneumonia. Read more: http://2wsb.tv/2cqXP3z

Attorney Paul d'Oliveira of d'Oliveira & Associates, P.C. describes the side effects that some people are experiencing after taking Levaquin. If you or a loved one has been hurt by the drug Levaquin call us at 1-800-992-6878.

This claim has been circulating for a long time but now it is really getting the full Big-Lie treatment from mainstream media propagandists. Subsequent graphics show Ben Franklin warning of the dangers of German immigrants; the ‘Know-Nothings’ displaying ‘anti-Catholic, anti-immigrant sentiment’; an illustration of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882; Ku Klux Klan members in front of a burning cross and hating Italian immigrants; a woman in front of a Ford dealership deeply concerned about Jewish immigration to the United States; ‘repatriation’ of Mexicans during the Great Depression; a Japanese internment camp during World War II; and recent efforts in California and Arizona to curb illegal immigration.”

To dismiss concern about Muslims in the U.S. as mere “nativism” is to ignore the fact that these groups targeted by “nativists” were not committing terrorist acts or threatening the imminent conquest of the U.S. When this claim was articulated as “Muslims are the new Jews,” Bill Maher noted: “Jews weren’t oppressing anybody. There weren’t 5,000 militant Jewish groups. They didn’t do a study of treatment of women around the world and find that Jews were at the bottom of it. There weren’t 10 Jewish countries in the world that were putting gay people to death just for being gay.” Indeed, and no one is calling for or justifying genocide of Muslims now; there is no individual or group remotely comparable to the National Socialists in any genuine sense.

The late Christopher Hitchens also refuted this idea when writing a few years ago about the Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero: “‘Some of what people are saying in this mosque controversy is very similar to what German media was saying about Jews in the 1920s and 1930s,’ Imam Abdullah Antepli, Muslim chaplain at Duke University, told the New York Times. Yes, we all recall the Jewish suicide bombers of that period, as we recall the Jewish yells for holy war, the Jewish demands for the veiling of women and the stoning of homosexuals, and the Jewish burning of newspapers that published cartoons they did not like.”

All those who have excoriated Trump for his statements regarding a moratorium on Muslim immigration have ignored the problem that Trump was trying to address. None of his critics have come up with any alternative plan to prevent jihad terrorists from entering the country. Instead, they dismiss concerns about jihad terror as “nativism,” trying to browbeat and intimidate us into submission and silent acceptance of their globalist agenda.

Just in time for the 2016 election, San Francisco PBS affiliate KQED is offering a Common Core-ready lesson plan designed for public school teachers who want to indoctrinate students with a love for open borders and a deep suspicion of anyone who favors the immigration restrictions proposed by Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The lesson plan — which comes complete with “safe space” suggestions — is offered by way of a section of the taxpayer-funded television station’s website called “The Lowdown” (“connecting newsroom to classroom”).

The lesson, released this week, centers around a graphic comic entitled “Fear of Foreigners: A History of Nativism in America.”…

The second graphic in the comic shows Trump “calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

A bold, black-and-white box then informs students that “some Americans find his rhetoric alarming, but it follows a long tradition of anti-immigrant discourse.”

The next comic graphic informs students that “we still sometimes have a tendency to blame newcomers for national problems, especially in response to tough economic times and threats to national security.”

Subsequent graphics show Ben Franklin warning of the dangers of German immigrants; the “Know-Nothings” displaying “anti-Catholic, anti-immigrant sentiment”; an illustration of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882; Ku Klux Klan members in front of a burning cross and hating Italian immigrants; a woman in front of a Ford dealership deeply concerned about Jewish immigration to the United States; “repatriation” of Mexicans during the Great Depression; a Japanese internment camp during World War II; and recent efforts in California and Arizona to curb illegal immigration….

A second bold, black-and-white box instructs students that “it’s not surprising that Mexican immigrants and Muslim communities are the targets of this recent bout of nativism” because “countless Americans still struggle economically and the nation remains on edge after recent ISIS-inspired attacks.”…

When Raju asked Reid if Democrats are starting to get nervous because of the tightening poll numbers, the senator attacked the “cheap polls.”

“They’re tightening because people like the ones you work for get these cheap polls that they can keep making news on,” he said.

Raju hit back, saying that Reid uses time on the Senate floor for pedalling politics, not doing business.

“I mean, you’ve been going after him on the Senate floor where there’s supposed to be business done in the United States Senate,” he said. “You did the same against Mitt Romney in 2012. Is it okay for the Senate minority leader to use the Senate floor to overtly campaign against a presidential candidate?”

Reid said he has an obligation as a leader in the Democratic Party to “point out things that are wrong.”

Raju asked what Clinton needs to do differently as November draws closer.

Reid said he thinks Clinton is doing a good job thus far before attacked the poll numbers again.

Germany appears to have given up on integrating the millions of Muslim migrants pouring into the country and is instead encouraging German citizens to submit to Islam.

A television ad currently airing in Germany invites blonde-haired, blue-eyed women to embrace “tolerance” by wearing the Muslim hijab head dress.

The commercial begins with the text “Turkish women wear the hijab,” as a veiled woman is seen with her back to the camera.

However, when she turns around it immediately becomes clear that the woman is a white, blonde-haired German, before she states, “Me too! It’s beautiful!”

“Enjoy difference – start tolerance,” states the woman.

The campaign is funded by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, as well as German taxpayers, who are forced to obtain a state television license or face prison time.

Instead of reversing its suicidal immigration policy, it appears as though Germany is now encouraging its female population to avoid the mass sex assaults committed by Muslim migrants in numerous major cities by submitting to Islam and covering themselves up.

Holding potential rapists at arms’ length, not wearing provocative clothing, or wearing sneakers so they can run away – all advice given to German women by authorities – appears to not be working.

With birth rates in the central European nation flatlining, as Germans become less interested in sex, the dream of Green Party leader Stefanie von Berg, who celebrated the fact that mass migration will bring an end to German majority populations in cities within a few decades, is drawing closer.

Despite the left’s recent efforts to re-brand the hijab as a form of female empowerment, it’s actually a symbol of oppression.

“Well-intentioned women are wearing headscarves in interfaith “solidarity.” But, to us, they stand on the wrong side of a lethal war of ideas that sexually objectifies women as vessels for honor and temptation, absolving men of personal responsibility,” writes Asra Q. Nomani, founder of the Muslim Reform Movement.

The German television ad is extremely revealing. “Tolerance” means submission. “Diversity” means the willful extinction of German culture.

PAYPAL.ME-SUPPORT THIS BLOG

INFOWARS: THE FOURTH ESTATE, NOT STAR WARS

Adolf Hitler

ACTS 5:29

“Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.”

GEORGE WASHINGTON:

If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.

THOMAS JEFFERSON 1800

"I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

GOD ABOVE GOVERNMENT

Bible Obedience; Civil Disobedience

DISCLAIMER

Disclaimer: We are not responsible for all views posted on this website. Authors of articles, videos and/or selected texts are solely responsible for the content of their material. Linked material is the responsibility of the party who created it. Those sharing stories or testimonies are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of www.ratherexposethem.blogspot.com and/or its author.Copyright Disclaimer: Citation of articles and authors in this report does not imply ownership. Works and images presented here fall under Fair Use Section 107 and are used for commentary on globally significant newsworthy events. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.

Total Pageviews

Content in full or in part may be copyrighted.. Dynamic Views theme. Powered by Blogger.